Letter to the SWP

 A letter from sympathetic socialists, who have a history of working with the party, addresses the crisis:

The ongoing crisis in the Socialist Workers’ Party – precipitated by the handling of rape allegations against a senior party member – has raised fundamental questions about democracy, power and sexism in the organisations and culture of the left. We believe that the way in which the central committee of the SWP has handled the situation, and its lack of a reasonable response to the legitimate protests voiced by many of its own members, as well as others on the left, point to issues that cannot simply be swept under the rug.

We have all previously participated in events and initiatives promoted by the SWP, including the annual Marxism festival, or written for its publications. We continue to value the commitment and work of many SWP members as trades unionists, activists and comrades. Nonetheless, we can no longer in good conscience participate in SWP publications and platforms until the party recognises and seriously addresses the legitimate criticisms of its handling of this case and the ensuing crisis.

Greg Albo, Abbie Bakan, Jairus Banaji, Gail Day, Steve Edwards, Nadine El-Enany, Phil Gasper, Peter Hallward, Adam Hanieh, Owen Hatherley, Paul Kellogg, Brian Kelly, Conor Kostick, Robert Knox, Thomas Marois, David McNally, Adam Morton, James Murphy, Kevin Murphy, Ilan Pappé, Charles Post, Nina Power, Gregory Schwartz, Peter Thomas, Alberto Toscano, Thomas Walpole, Jeffery Webber, Rafeef Ziadah

Lines in the Sand

This is a question for members of the SWP: what is your line in the sand?

We believe that a revolutionary socialist party is indispensable for social transformation. Given the forces ranged against us and the necessity of unity in action, it's reasonable that most of us will, in most circumstances, not allow disagreement with this or that aspect of 'the line' to place us at fundamental odds with the party.

However. If we have no line in the sand, if there were no issues or miscalculations or scandals that would cause us to set ourselves publicly against our leadership, we wouldn't be hardened radicals, or unsentimental and rigorous thinkers, or tough-minded streetfighters, or anything of that sort. If we had no line in the sand, we'd be chumps.

We'd be telling the all-too-human leaders of the SWP that there'd be no error so bad, no line so egregious they could advance, no malfeasance so shocking, that it would make us stand up to them. We'd be declaring ourselves their serfs.

The current crisis in the SWP, out from under which members are attempting to dig, without the help of a CC that seems alternately paralysed, purblind and spiteful, is, for those of us who write on this blog, that line in the sand.

This is why we urge all SWP branches to demand a special conference as quickly as possible, as a last chance to save the party from disgrace.

Of course, there are comrades who, though appropriately appalled by recent events, don't see it that way, and who hesitate to make such a demand. We respectfully but urgently disagree.

Many in the organisation have become convinced that a systematic cover-up of serious allegations has taken place. The party must be given an opportunity to examine the claims. But even those who refuse to believe any such thing could have happened can't deny the succession of subsequent scandals:

Shameful procedures.
The leadership have signed off on and refused to apologise for an utterly inappropriate investigation, which included asking a woman alleging sexual harassment appallingly sexist questions such as: ‘Was it fair to say [she] liked to have a drink?’

The attempted crushing of discussion.
The leadership has expelled (so far) four activists, on trumped-up charges, for the crime of discussing the unfolding situation online.

Lying about members, to members.
The leadership has deliberately misrepresented its internal critics in Party Notes.

The mass outrage of members.
The leadership has by its actions unleashed not only a growing number of resignations from the party, but the mass fury, rage and rebellion of our student comrades.

Appalling political miscalculation.
The leadership tried to close down discussion by fiat, absurdly declaring that the matter was closed, an astounding misreading of the facts on the ground.

Anti-democratic and unconstitutional methods.
The leadership has attempted to short-circuit calls for a special conference to lance this boil by pulling bureaucratic procedure out of the air – announcing, without the slightest constitutional authority, an arbitrary deadline for such demands.

Losing the respect of our IST comrades.
The leadership’s actions have provoked stern criticism from prominent members of our own international tendency, and have resulted in the exit of one organisation.

The loss of our credibility on vital issues.
The leadership has created a situation where our own members and others no longer have faith in us to address issues of gender, sexism and sexual violence.

Our boycotting by non-aligned comrades.
The leadership has created a situation in which, despite the unconvincing ‘Crisis, What Crisis?’ argument in Party Notes, non-aligned comrades and activists who have worked closely with us before, in campaigns and intellectual work, are boycotting us. This situation will only get worse.

Our CC repeatedly insists on its ‘toughness’. The corollary of this must be trenchant self-criticism, the ability to learn frankly from mistakes. Throughout this entire debacle, the CC has refused to acknowledge one scrap of responsibility. This is both astonishing and shameful. They have refused to show any understanding of what they have done, let alone any political humility about it. This is not a moralistic injunction: the arrogance in this refusal represents a colossal failure of politics. How can we trust their political judgments on any issue when they are blind to or in denial about their own catastrophic errors, and remain incapable of dealing with or even acknowledging the continuing political fallout therefrom?

The claim that the situation is Business as Usual is self-evidently absurd: we are tainted by a toxic combination of sexism, unaccountability, anti-democratic manoeuvering and the pathologisation of dissent. We cannot continue without an accounting. It is up to grassroots members to reclaim the integrity of the SWP; our leaders have shown themselves incapable and unworthy. A conference is a vital first step.

Therefore we urge all our comrades to ask themselves the question: given all of the above, have you reached your line in the sand? And if not, where will that line be?

- China Mieville

A message of support to the SWP opposition

Any Irish socialist wishing to discuss this message with Conor is welcome to do so. conorkostick@gmail.com

The crisis in the UK SWP is of international significance and the issues raised by it are of such concern that I have no hesitation in offering this statement on the matter, even though my affiliation is to the Irish SWP. We are all part of an international tradition that will suffer from the fallout of a serious political mistake by the leadership of the UK SWP and especially here in Ireland, where any issue related to institutional cover-ups of sex crimes has enormous public resonance.

It is not necessary to know the details of the particular case that has triggered this crisis to appreciate how deeply mistaken has been the approach of the CC. All one needs to know is that when a leading member of the party was accused of rape, the party allowed comrades who knew him and who had worked with him for decades to decide what the SWP response would be. No amount of appeals to the revolutionary integrity of those on the DC can undo this fact and this shocking display of ignorance of best practice in the labour movement (and indeed, wider society).

A supporter of the UK SWP rang me to attempt to persuade me that all was in order at SWP conference. His arguments included these two points: that it was not practical to find a group of comrades who did not know the accused, and that the DC had been elected before this allegation arose. I assume these points are being repeated in the UK. They do not stand up.
Firstly, of course it was possible to find a DC willing to look into the question of expelling Delta who did not know him (this is a criminal matter, and the only judgement the SWP has the right to make on it is whether Delta is fit to be a member of the party). Comrades could have been brought in from abroad, or the assistance of someone from the labour movement outside the party with no axe to grind and experience in these matters could have been sought.

Secondly, to persist in judging this issue with a compromised DC, because they had been elected at the previous conference, is bureaucratic pedantry. What would the party have done if – as they should have – the individuals on the DC had declared themselves unfit to investigate someone they knew so well? A new DC would have had to be formed and the correctness of this initative, like all SWP initiatives, would have been judged at the subsequent conference.

So, a serious mistake was made. When I talk of a ‘mistake’, I am speaking the language of politics, not morals, although I share the instinctive repugnance at how this matter was handled of all those who have expressed their outrage at the trauma inflicted on the woman concerned. Since interventionist politics are an art, albeit one guided by theory, all revolutionary parties make mistakes. But in a healthy revolutionary party, the mistakes are quickly addressed and lessons are collectively learned for the future.

In this case, however, it is obvious from the various reports coming in and their own published responses that the CC would clearly prefer to smash the party against the judgement of absolutely everyone outside its ranks than admit the mistake. All political mistakes do damage, but the CC and their supporters are massively downplaying the impact of this one.

One of the fundamental divisions between Marx’s theory of revolution and its predecessors was the sentiment that revolutionaries should not be conspiratorial and should never knowingly publish lies. Our strategy for undermining capitalist control of the media is to rely on the fact that the truth is on our side. In their efforts to deny their mistake, the CC have been lying to the party and that is inexcusable. The events of the 2011 conference surrounding Delta were a lie and now we read CC and SWSS reports of party successes that are equally lies. No longer do SWP members and branches rely on a centrally controlled Party Notes or newspaper to inform them, so it is politically foolish as well as an affront to the Marxist tradition to talk of warm receptions and positive experiences when they are not true. This behaviour is unforgiveable in a revolutionary leadership.

Both for this reason and the horrible-to-witness bureacratic measures attempting to stifle the opposition, I am inspired to write this statement expressing my full solidarity with those trying restore the reputation of the SWP as an imporant ally for those wanting to fight oppression.

I hope you win your recall conference, that you defeat those who have lied to you, and that you elect a leadership more worthy of the tradition in which the party stands.

Conor Kostick
SWP Ireland
(Personal Capacity)

King's College London SWSS Statement

  Since the beginning of term, a number of students have raised concerns with members of our SWSS group over the way that recent allegations of sexual assault and rape have been handled by the Central Committee (CC) and Disputes Committee (DC). We feel that it is incumbent on us to respond to these concerns.

As a SWSS group we share many of the concerns that have been raised, and expressed our views at the recent SWP conference. The woman involved, comrade W, has made it clear that she does not want the case itself to be reopened. However, it is absolutely necessary that the SWP reviews its procedures and learns from mistakes made. The Central Committee should have been at the forefront of fighting for these changes. We condemn them for failing in this duty. We also condemn their refusal to acknowledge the political impact that this issue has had on our ability to intervene in class struggle. It is vital that the SWP now works to correct this mistake. As a SWSS group we are arguing for this in our local branch.

The current crisis engulfing the SWP isn’t a crisis of Leninism, nor can the divisions inside the party regarding the handling of the disputes case, and its subsequent release into the mass media, be put down to “creeping autonomist” or “feminist” influences. As an aside, we would like to say that we do not see feminism as a slur, indeed with the recent rise of raunch culture, feminism has been, for many, a route into class politics. Responsibility for this crisis lies with the leadership of the organisation, who have falsely portrayed this as a generational problem and whose response has led to unnecessary polarisation.

For a revolutionary party to intervene in class struggle we have to have a continual analysis of the world around us, the political developments and balance of forces. This then informs how we can best move forward with our general perspectives. Sometimes this occurs on a localised level, such as when we campaign around local service closures, at other times this means having a national reorientation of our activity; for example the workfare protests. In the latter case, in response to a wider political development, the leadership of the organisation is responsible for re-orientating comrades to best implement our general strategy. It is this principle that makes democratic centralism and the Leninist party able to quickly react to a changing world.

Whilst the fallout from the crisis so far has not just affected students, our SWSS groups have been particularly affected. Not only has the lack of political leadership left comrades unconfident to engage with our periphery on this question, but it has resulted in key figures inside the movement severing ties with our organisation – harming our national strategy. Instead of compounding these issues, we demand the CC move to address the concerns raised.

We have argued in our branches:

1. That the CC must fully acknowledge and engage with the concerns that both our members and our allies have raised.

2. For a commission looking at ways that the dispute committee process can be improved. While the case itself is closed, our investigation into future improvements must be ongoing.

3. That Comrade Delta should stand down from all public and/or paid positions in the SWP and/or united fronts for the foreseeable future.

4. There must be no reprisals for comrades expressing their concerns and ideas for improvement in light of the recent crisis.

5. To reaffirm the right of branches to call for a special conference at any point in the year.

We believe that these changes will ensure that in the future all comrades will feel confident to bring any complaint they may have to the party.

We are faced with a nasty coalition government, determined to use the current crisis to dismantle the welfare state and erode freedoms previously won. In this climate it is vital that we have a strong and functioning SWP that can work with a range of allies on the left in opposing this attack. The SWP has a proud tradition of fighting against oppression, exploitation and for a better world. Therefore it is vital that we overcome the current crisis as quickly as possible in order to concentrate on this fight. The leadership’s current position is an obstacle to doing this.

Can I get a conference?

The SWP is in crisis. In the weeks since our annual conference, comrades around the country have been doing everything we can to rescue the party from the disastrous course the current Central Committee seems intent on following. The stakes are high - we are fighting for the future of our party and of the International Socialist tradition in Britain.
One question that continually comes up when discussing our crisis with other members and within the movement is whether it is possible to win our position within the party. The Central Committee clearly has no intention of backing down, of listening to members, of taking action to correct the crisis. Instead it is committed to using bureaucratic manoeuvres in its attempts to close down discussion. And where it cannot close down discussion, it is resorting to appalling misrepresentations off the arguments and the comrades opposed to it.
However, there is a growing call for a special conference, where the issues facing us can be fully discussed, openly and honestly. According to our rules we need 20% of branches to call a special conference. We have counted 93 official branches from information supplied by the National Secretary and he has accepted that the trigger point is 19 branches.
Already at least seven branches have passed motions which go all the way in calling for a special conference. These are:
Aberdeen
Edinburgh
Liverpool
Manchester Rusholme
Hull
Canterbury
Croydon
This call has met with huge support from our student comrades, with the following dozen Socialist Worker Student Society groups making public calls for comrades to support a special conference:
Brunel
UKC (Kent)
University of Essex
University of East London
Portsmouth
Queen Mary
Manchester University
Portsmouth
Leeds University
LSE
Birkbeck
Sussex University
Comrades in at least a further eight party branches have passed various motions critical of the CC's handling of the issues before and/or since conference:
Wandsworth & Merton
Bury
Lewisham
Portsmouth
Tower Hamlets
Euston
Brixton
Norwich
Brighton
To have fifteen party branches and a dozen SWSS groups already openly criticising the CC shows that there is a party to be won here. We must continue to push for a special conference. Comrades in other branches or in branches which have so far not yet been won to this position should take heart from the progress so far. We may not have won yet, but we can. And to be clear, even if we can't, we have to fight.
(The Central Committee has attempted to impose an arbitrary and unconstitutional deadline of 1 Feb for such a call. Comrades and branches around the country have rejected this. We expect the CC to use next weekend's National Committee meeting to attempt once again to shut down debate within the party. We and many, many other comrades will not allow that to happen.)
Good luck!
Emma – Norwich
Alex – Oxford
Richard – Hornsey & Wood Green
Linda - Edinburgh
Gareth - Camden
Jamie - Edinburgh
Gonzalo – Euston
China, Brent & Harrow
Kris – Wandsworth & Merton
Julian – Liverpool
John – Euston
Andy - Leicester

Further Education (FE) SWSS members statement

 As FE SWSS members* we would like to make public that we condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the recent handling of very serious accusations against a leading member of the SWP Central Committee.

The Socialist Workers Party is in crisis. Over the last month, our reputation as the best fighters on the left has been dealt hefty blows. It is time the straw man arguments the CC has consistently used since November are dispensed with and the CC acts to stop the inevitable demise of our organisation; at the centre of these arguments is the report of the Disputes Committee, a mere two fifths of conference delegates approved the Disputes Committee report, a vote at conference that tends to be unanimous. Despite the wish of the Central Committee at the end of Conference for the matter to ‘remain closed’ it was never to be so, even before a full transcript was released in sectarian blogs.

All members of the SWP should take these suggestions to their branches and argue for a special conference through the mechanisms in place to keep the party democratically accountable.

As an organisation, the SWP has a long and proud tradition of fighting for women’s liberation; the actions of the CC have caused this reputation significant and irreversible damage to those in and outside the organisation.

As FE SWSS members, we call for:
1) A special conference, so the organisation can resolve this political crisis in a way that holds accountable those responsible and gives the membership the clarity and confidence needed to implement our political strategy.
2) An immediate public response that can provide clarity around the failures of the DC’s due process.
3) Delta to be removed from any official or public position within our organization, particularly given disagreement on the DC with respect to the question of Delta’s conduct.
4) The Reinstatement of all comrades either replaced or removed to their original positions

Signed by
Dexter Hill
Gina Elby
Kaity Squires
Ollie Vargas
Robert Jones
Amy Ward
Shereen Prasad
Rob Jones

*We would like to make crystal clear that we do not claim to represent the views of all FE SWSS members, only the concerned members listed. However, we would welcome further signatories, and urge FE students who agree with us to add their signatures.

University of East London SWSS Statement

For an outward looking SWSS

University of East London (UEL) Socialist Worker Student Society (SWSS) holds the International Socialist tradition in the highest regard. A tradition founded upon breaking from the evils of Western capitalism and the horrors of Stalinism, and one that fights to this day for real working-class emancipation. A tradition that has fought tirelessly against sexism, racism, homophobia and the class exploitation that capitalism creates. It is as proud followers of this immense political tradition that we feel the necessity to write this statement.

Our SWSS group publicly condemns our leadership’s recent handling of a serious allegation of sexual abuse brought against a leading member of the party. We believe the subsequent inability of the Central Committee (CC) to address the crisis embroiling the party, is paramount to, and indicative of their refusal to accept any responsibility for their bureaucratic mishandling of the case, concerns and political turmoil comrades have faced in both the pre and post-conference periods.

We recognise that this is a crisis that could and should have been avoided. We believe that the reprehensible response the CC have conjured up represents a detachment from the hostility comrades have faced in their workplaces, campus’s and unions, which has paralysed our ability to carry out the interventionist work required of a revolutionary party. The clear demarcation of the leadership’s relationship to the membership, and their insulting disregard for the political turmoil we face in our respective workplaces and campus’s was typified in the most recent pseudo claims in Party Notes, denouncing the political concerns of the emerging opposition as seeking to overturn our Marxist analysis of women’s liberation, and no longer seeing the working class as central to the fight for socialism.

We also condemn in the strongest terms possible, the hostility and negligence being emitted onto our student groups across the country, where comrades have faced a tirade of slander and personal assaults, whilst a section of disgraceful sectarians have tried to score political points without any regard to the confidentiality of the women involved in the DC case by circulating the transcript of the DC session at conference.

We affirm and stand by our organisation’s commitment to women’s liberation. We adhere to the party’s proud theoretical tradition of understanding women’s oppression through a revolutionary Marxist perspective, and we acknowledge the tremendous work the party has done in fighting for women’s liberation. We celebrate Lindsey German’s 'sex, class and socialism', Chris Harman’s “Women’s liberation and revolutionary socialism”, and Tony Cliff’s “Class Struggle and Women’s liberation”, as the cornerstone of our political tradition. We will always agitate within this tradition, and we will build the organisation and the wider developing movement by doing so. However we reject the following; the failure of the DC to carry out the investigation into allegations of a sexual nature in an entirely impartial way, the concomitant manner in which the DC and the CC have failed comrade ‘W’ and the membership by undermining ‘W’s’ rights and moving to stifle any dissenters who supported her, and the brandishing of the term ‘feminism’ as an apparent insult. All of which we believe mark a sharp departure from our party’s tradition on women’s liberation. We recognise that across the world, a broad movement is developing, from Slut-Walks, Pro-Choice Demonstrations and Anti-Sexual harassment rallies. Therefore we see feminism as a root in to class politics, and not a root out, as it was in the downturn of the class struggle that saturated the early 1980’s. We also maintain that no political organisation is abstracted from the impacts on society under capitalism, including our own organisation.

We note that SWSS’s across the country are facing the destruction of our groups, our work and our relationships with various societies on our campuses. Our student’s union officials are facing serious pressures, including votes of no-confidence and no-platforms. The possibilities of united left slates are in disarray as left activists vary from refusing to work with us, to petitioning and demanding public statements. We are no exception. Confoundedly, the SWSS Notes emailed to us by the Student Office this week provided no attempt to deal with the tumultuous situations we are confronted with. Instead of displaying any form of political lead, this has hailed yet another departure from our party’s political tradition, and did not resemble the political content or strategy one would expect from a revolutionary party. This is epitomised by the notes argument that we should stand SWSS-only slates, as opposed to forming united left slates, or trying to rebuild relationships with societies and activists who would have otherwise stood with us in elections. We face the distinct possibility of having the gains we’ve made in our SWSS groups around the country for the last three years being substantially rolled back, unless the leadership is willing to address the situation we face, and bare responsibility for their role in it. 

There is still work to be done – and we will vehemently fight against any rolling back in the student strategy, which is hastily becoming evident after the unexplained decisions to remove leading student organisers, the prevention of leading student activists from running in national elections, and the futile strategy proposed in this week’s SWSS notes. SWSS have not been the only ones facing the brunt of this backlash. Comrades have gone into their workplaces and faced bullying and belittling by their colleagues having read the articles online, as it has now spread to be a debate among various left organisations, including a commentary by Owen Jones.

If complaints of sexism or allegations of any sort are made, we stand by a full and thorough investigation by the DC, but believe that the work and purpose of the DC must be reviewed, after the evident concerns that have been expressed by many comrades in relation to the recent handling of the DC’s investigation into allegations of rape. We also believe this process should be absolutely free from the weight imposed by the Central Committee, through the use of elements of the apparatus and organisers.

We recognise that within our organisation members will play significant roles in leading various struggles and representing the party in our United Front work. This can mean that some members have more influence inside of the organisation dependent upon the work they’ve done, their position and the length of time they have been in the party.  In addition we also recognise the immense capability and pressure that members of the SWP can have on the outside world. This means that when a fight is to be had, the SWP punches above its weight and has a disproportionate impact for our size.

Our ability to punch above of our weight is phenomenal, and therefore we celebrate the significant impact the party can have in struggles, and we understand that the roles our leading members fulfil for the organisation in these struggles can mean they have a powerful influence inside of the party. However, this should in no circumstances mean that when a member brings forward an allegation of sexual misconduct against a leading member of the party, they should have to face the kind of horrendous questioning and treatment comrade ‘W’ did.

Furthermore the CC position that the “case is now closed”, is an indication and a sign of a developing defensiveness. The CC’s inability to address the internal and public furore does not enable our comrades to make a political response to the questions being asked in our workplaces and on our campuses. Rather we have been subjected to a disingenuous appeal to ‘confidentiality’ in the party’s public statements, quasi-retorts in this week’s party notes about members trying to overhaul our tradition, and facile responses in our branches that were aimed at trying to disengage from the current crisis, and fill comrades with an overwhelming sense of encouraging optimism that this will just simply pass us by. These inadequate responses, fail to recognise the crisis that has engulfed our organisation, they do not acknowledge the damage being done to the party’s work, and they offer no sensible lead or explanation to our members and those that we work with.

We have been among some of the biggest and proudest builders of the Socialist Workers Party over the recent years, delving not only into student work, but across all of our united front’s, when the political period is tense, the party often rightfully utilises its students for building the organisation in every form, as our position in the class, and responsibilities, allow us to be more flexible. We will continue to build the organisation no matter how much pressure is applied onto the SWP and its student members. This is because it is an organisation we are exceptionally proud of; an organisation we want to fight for.

SWSS maintains its ability to have direct control over the way it organises on a local level, from caucus agenda’s, meetings and speakers, and our wider United front work, not autonomous from the organisation, but in unison with the organisation and its national strategy. Whether it is the strategy to build a strong rank-and-file worker’s movement, fighting back Tory austerity, or carrying on the tradition of breaking the backs of fascists, who seek to marginalize and scapegoat oppressed minorities. This is to say that we do not want the political undermining that has been on-going pre and post-conference to continue to affect the way we build.

UEL SWSS desires to move forwards as a unified party, but unless the CC take responsibility for their failures to lead in a time of crisis and immediately engage in a politically constructive response to our members and those we work with, the descending trajectory of our organisation and the failures of our leadership to address it, will bring our party in to disrepute, forever hindering our ability to intervene in the coming class struggles. Comrades, we want to bring down the Tories, stop the cuts, smash the fascists and strengthen the left and workers confidence to fight back across the world. We believe that the SWP is the revolutionary party capable of having this impact, and we will continue to fight for the vanguard party that we can be. Therefore we believe that our leadership has to reconsider their impotent position and respond reasonably, as would be expected of a revolutionary leadership, to the crisis we are in. Thus we demand; there be an amnesty over the punishment of comrades that have expressed concerns, no students should be isolated, marginalised or expelled from the organisation based on their factional declarations within the pre-conference period, as by right members are entitled to, there must be a full review over the Disputes Committee, and that Comrade Delta should not represent the party in any public or united front work during this extremely difficult period.

In Solidarity,

UEL SWSS